Pages

Friday, July 13, 2012

IN SUPPORT OF PRESIDENT JONATHAN

President Jonathan

I share the concern of President Jonathan over the hazards
of demographic upsurge in Nigeria. I concur with him when he said, during his
address at the swearing in of the newly-appointed chairman and commissioners of
the National Population Commission (NPC) on Tuesday,June 26th, 2012, that: ‘For us to plan properly we
must manage our population; but it is extremely sensitive; we are extremely
religious people;…’

In the run-up to the 2011 elections I wrote on this page why I Will Not Vote For Him; I did not, and given the chance one hundred
times, I will never vote for him. He, certainly, does not represent what I expect,
or possess what I believe to be the qualities of a leader. But truth, wherever
found, should be accepted, regardless of who speaks it, even if it be the devil
himself!

Let me warn the reader that this piece is a moving truck; it
will hit many people among the proponents and opponents of birth control
(including Islamic scholars), and the arguments advanced by each group to
buttress their position. I expect this presentation to elicit intellectual ripostes
on the issue of contraception based on the basic sources of Islamic law. The
Glorious Qur’an, for instance, does not contain any unequivocal statement for or
against contraception. Those adversaries of family planning who quote verses
from the Qur’an out of context as evidence of the prohibition of contraception
should search for proof elsewhere and read very well the reason for the
revelation of the verses. For example they put forward this verse:

‘kill not your children on a plea of want;- We provide
sustenance for you and for them;-‘(Al An’aam 6:151).

And another one which states:

‘Kill not your children for fear of want: We shall provide
sustenance for them as well as for you. Verily the killing of them is a great
sin.’ (Israa’eel17:31).

These verses were revealed in order to condemn and put an end
to the inhuman practice of female infanticide which abounds during the time of
(jaahiliyyah) ignorance, the pre-Islamic era. The female child was seen
as ‘a liability to the family.’ Thus, as soon as they came into this world,
‘they were buried alive.’ In spite of the fact that female infanticide is
proscribed by the authority of these verses, yet ‘no deduction may be made from
this prohibition to condemn contraception. The latter is by nature different
from infanticide. Infanticide is the actual killing of an already existing
child, whereas contraception involves no killing and the supposed “child” does
not yet exist. It is a common fact that during the process of reproduction only
one sperm finally succeeds in fertilizing the ovum. Does this mean that all the
other countless sperms that eventually die are dead children?’

The parting of the way, however, between me and the President
is in making legislation out of birth control. This sound likes ‘couples should be required to submit
applications to have a child.’ You have no right to determine the size of my
family. (jìhuà shēngyù zhèngcè; literally "policy of birth planning")
is the one-child limitation in the population control policy of the People’s
Republic of China (PRC), which restricts couples to having only one child, for
the purposes of reducing ‘the demand of natural resources, maintaining a steady
labour rate, reducing unemployment caused from surplus labour. This policy
caused a number of social problems: forced abortions, female infanticide as
each family prefers a male child, and thus creating another problem of gender
imbalance. One wonders whether the religious scholars who cite China as ‘the
largest developing country’ in the world in spite of its population, know what
they are saying, or are aware of the one-child per family law? So, can one say
then that China succeeded because of its population control? These same
scholars say that ‘Ethiopia is one of the countries with smallest population
but it is among the poorest.’ Do these scholars know about Brunei or Qatar?

The hatred that people show towards family planning
programmes is not without genuine reasons, not the least the dark history
associated with the infamous founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger
whose ‘entire life's purpose was to promote birth control.’ This racist, devil
incarnate ‘believed that light-skinned races were superior to dark-skinned
races’, thus coined the term “birth control” in order"to create a race of
thoroughbreds," and desiring ‘to exterminate the Negro population’. ‘Sanger
espoused the thinking of eugenicists -- similar to Darwin's "survival of
the fittest" -- but related the concept to human society, saying the
genetic makeup of the poor, and minorities, for example, was inferior.’
Therefore, the goal was "to prevent the multiplication of bad stocks.” In
Margaret’s position, blacks are "...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,'
'spawning... human beings who never should have been born." Her stance on motherhood is most bizarre: "I
cannot refrain from saying that women must come to recognize there is some
function of womanhood other than being a child-bearing machine." And that:
"The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant
members is to kill it."

How can people accept any message from Planned Parenthood
Nigeria which is a franchise of Planned Parenthood Federation of America
founded by Margaret Sanger? Why must we always cut-and-paste from the
West? So, those who see family planning as a conspiracy against the developing
nations are right afterall.

Muslims can proudly assert that even before the great
grandmother of Margaret Sanger was born there was a contraceptive method in
practice during the lifetime of the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him) known
as Al’azl (coitus interruptus). The literal meaning of al’azl
is removal or separation. Technically, ‘it is used to describe the process of
withdrawal by the man at the time of emission to prevent insemination of the
ovum.’

Jabir narrates, ‘We used to practice ‘azl (coitus
interruptus) in the Prophet’s lifetime while the Qur’an was being revealed.’
Another version of the same hadeeth reads, ‘We used to practise ‘azl
during the Prophet’s lifetime and he was informed about this and did not forbid
us.’

With the aid of modern biomedical sciences we now have other
methods of conception other than ‘azl; some are reversible, like rhythm method,
condom (sheath), intra-uterine device (I.U.D e.g loop), progestogen – pill only,
etc.; others are not reversible; including tubal ligation, vasectomy and
hysterectomy with which many doctors fool couples as being reversible whereas
they succeed only in about half of the cases of reversal.

Both husband and wife have rights on the issue of the use of
any method of contraception, thus their consent must be sought before its
application. But Muslim scholars ‘unanimously agree it is not permissible to
make use of any devices that might permanently incapacitate a person, either
man or woman, from procreation whether or not either or both spouses consent.’
The danger of sterilizing anyone is grave and the wisdom of the Islamic
position is very easy to see. When you sterilize a woman who has got some
children; you are precluding a disaster that can decimate that family and in
some cases wipe out that number in future. If such happens, will she get a new
womb? Can anyone foresee the future or read the fortunes?

The Planned Parenthood Federation of Nigeria (PPFN) has no
scruples about sterilizing a woman without recourse to the husband. Indeed
there have been cases of women sterilized “for their own good” without
even their own consent.

The Glorious Qur’an encourages us have at least 30 months
between the period of pregnancy and that of lactation: “…and his gestation
and suckling are in 30 months” (Al Ahqaaf 46: 15). ‘The mothers
shall give suck to their offspring for two whole years,’ (Al Baqarah
2:233). So, that gives a minimum of 6 months for pregnancy and 24 months
for suckling. If this Qur’anic encouragement were to be followed, couples may
end up with only 3 children in 10 years! But when I look around I see women
given birth to 10 children in 10 years or even more.

I will not hesitate to use ‘azl, condom, pill or any
form of reversible contraception where the life of my wife is threatened by
potential pregnancy or if repeated pregnancies would weaken her body such that
she can neither take care of the baby nor herself. I will also ‘family plan’
to grant my wife rest between pregnancies, thus giving her the chance to look
20 years younger than her contemporaries. But people are unreasonably averse to
contraception no matter the reason, even where the woman’s health is
threatened.

Take the case of a woman who is already suckling an infant; it
would be harmful both for herself and her child if she became pregnant. Often
times such women have recourse to contraceptive methods without the consent of
their husbands. Many of the opponents of family planning do not know that their
wives are already practicing one form of contraception or another, including
the irreversible method which is haraam- courtesy of the growing number
of discreet ‘family planning clinics’ made popular by Margaret Sanger.

Most of these women deem their husband’s finances are
insufficient to support more children at the moment, but the husbands are obdurate.
The Prophet said to Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqaas (RA) when the latter intended to give
all his wealth in charity: ‘O Sa’d,’ the Prophet said, ‘it is better to leave
your heirs wealthy than for you to leave them poor, begging of people after
your death…’ Some scholars do not sanction family planning on the basis of
financial ability of parents to care for many children; they see that as
disbelief in the providence of Allah, as every child comes to the world with
its own sustenance. But others do not see the matter in that light. Parenthood,
they said, is a responsibility about which Allah will ask couples. Discharging
that duty carries with it the provision of life’s basic necessities to your
offspring. Therefore, bearing issues beyond one’s ability is failing in
parental responsibility. It is not ‘disbelief in the providence of Allah.’ Certainly,
‘Islam and common sense would not approve of married people with insufficient
means continuing to beget children who could neither be fed nor given proper
education.

There is another opinion that is right in between these two:
spacing the children is to give the mother good health and the baby a chance to
be nurtured properly before the next. The sustenance of the child came with it
as Allah has mentioned and poverty is not a permanent aspect of a man’s life. Suppose
a family were to have the means to support just two children; after the first
child and the woman gets pregnant, what would they do if the new pregnancy
turns out to be a set of triplets or more? Kill a few?

Only because the government does not know its role and it is
thus not fulfilling it are we having such a large number of destitute people
living in raw and abject poverty. If the government were to be alive to its
responsibilities it would provide for its less privileged citizens and not
advocate for their reduction and or elimination. It would hold itself to
account and would do the needful to support the weak. Disguised eugenics will
not work with a “deeply religious people”

Let the President know that Nigeria does not need family
planning to be enacted as national policy. Education and effective advocacy
will serve better purpose in enlightening the people.

As a bona fide resident of Abuja, one of the most expensive
cities in the world, I need no one to tell me how many children I can take care
of with regard to the type of education I would like them to attain; what
school fees I can pay, and the standard of living to maintain. Given all the above,
I will seek the understanding of my wife to prepare for long resting periods
between pregnancies and planning our family with whatever form of contraception
we choose according to the advice of our gynaecologist!

On occasions like this, you can't help but exclaim 'thank God Almighty, Nigerians are deeply religious people.' Without doubt, the mandate to increase, multiply and fill the earth embodies within it the responsibility of planning and managing human sexuality, procreation and population to ensure human flourishing. But there is a huge difference between private family planning decisions, which should be made between couples and their doctors, one one hand; and state-mandated population control, on the other hand. I have not read the President's address, but if he said what is quoted in your piece, I will disagree with his position that we--meaning the state--needs to "manage"--euphemism for (state) "control"--our population in order that we plan properly. What the state needs for planning is an accurate population census, not state mandated population control--under any guise. Advocates of population control begin from a faulty assumption that the human person is a problem to be solved instead of divinely endowed resource to be harnessed, empowered and unleashed to fulfill his/her divinely ordained flourishing. It bears repetition : "Nigeria does not need family planning to be enacted as national policy. Education and effective advocacy will serve better purpose in enlightening the people." Thanks again for using your voice.

The contents of this blog are from my weekly column with LEADERSHIP Friday Newspapers. Therefore, the date of publication here may vary from that on which the original piece appeared on the Leadership column.